Well, I am in a writing mood, so let me take you apart on the points you are trying to make. I highlight the points I am trying to make, to make it easier for you to concentrate on the important stuff and not on supporting verbiage.
RobertJasiek wrote:
Bantari wrote:
If it takes less effort to reach a rank, there would be more players with that rank.
No. If more players increase, they will find tougher competition on the next higher rank, and so they will also decrease again, on average.
No.
If it is easier to go up ranks, more people will go up ranks. If more people go up the ranks, there will be more people in the higher ranks.
If there are more people in the higher ranks, the system will become more top-heavy.
There is no way around it.
RobertJasiek wrote:
You still do not understand: different players are NOT treated equally by the KGS rating system, but frequently playing players are given much tougher opposition by the KGS rating system to improve.
Rating does not do the pairing. There might be a quirk of the automatch feature which behaves as you say, I have no clue. No clue if this is even what you mean. But rating itself does *not* take care of who you play. It is either your choice or the automatch. This really makes me doubt you understand what rating is.
Looking at your game history: you are a correct 4d.
Start beating 5d players regularly (or just play them more and beat them), stop losing to 3d players (important!), and you will get to 5d. That's the trick.
I don't see how you can expect the system to make you 5d when you lose so often to 3d players. Not to mention 4d players.
RobertJasiek wrote:
Quote:
according to this particular rating system, you are not yet strong enough to reach 5d on KGS, pure and simple.
Wrong.
There are plenty of 5d players on KGS, not to mention higher ranks.
When somebody plays strong enough to reach 5d, they reach 5d, or there would be very few 5d players.
I have myself seen players who started as lower ranks and made it to 5d and beyond. If you play strong enough, you get there, trust me.
RobertJasiek wrote:
It is easy for me to win ca. 70% (and create lots of 8 ~ 12 wins in a row series) as a KGS 4d if
- I play almost exclusively for the purpose of fighting against the KGS rating system,
- I play only even games with komi,
- I never play 10s games,
- I never play when tired or under stress of work.
Study my KGS games and you can notice that
- I play MUCH weaker in them than in real games (also because the rating system creates such a great frustration),
- the distribution of scores incl. the resigned games assessed by positional judgement favours myself.
What does this have to do with anything?
I play much weaker online as well, but it would never ever in a million years occur to me to blame it on the rating system. Your opponents also play tired, or drunk, or whatever. How many of your wins can be contributed to such external factors? You seriously assume you are the only one who loses games because of stress or too fast timer?
Robert,
this really sounds like excuses. The fact remains - there are plenty of people who made it from 4d to 5d and beyond on KGS, so if you are strong enough it is certainly possible. As a matter of fact,
people graduate up the rating ladder all the time on KGS, when they play strong enough to reach the next level from wherever they are. This includes frequently playing people, seldom playing people, tired people, drunk people, and anything in between. Even you cannot refute this simple truth which is easily verifiable.
Since you don't seem to be able to make it, to me it clearly means that you are not strong enough. Now, this might be for many reasons, one of which might be mood you are playing or whatever other distractions, and you could surely try harder and make it. But this is not the fault of the rating system.
And this does not change the fact that - the way you play, you play as 4d, period. Maybe all these 5d players could really be 6d players if they tried harder, or maybe they would fall down to 4d if they tried less, who cares? The fact remain - the way you play, you're a 4d. Just like the way they play, they are 5d. And so on.
RobertJasiek wrote:
I would demonstrate it immediately if only I had the necessary successive weeks for overcoming the mentioned points AND the necessary time during the successive weeks for playing several games per day. Since currently I do not have them, every attempt to reach a higher rank would fail (I might win 65%, but this is not enough), and so long I prefer to play also for fun and when tired, and you see something like 50%.
This is your choice, and I see no problem with that. But again - do not blame it on the system. There are many casual players who made it from 4d to 5d, or from 5d to 6d, or whatever, on KGS, so this too must be possible when you are strong enough.
My circumstances in life right now are such that I also play at a rating a few stone below what I could accomplish. So? This is how I play, and once I start trying harder and playing stronger - my rating will go up. I mean - this is how the system works - it ranks you based on how you play. If you play like a 4d, this is where you land. When you start playing like 5d, you will eventually graduate. I am not sure why would you even want something different, it would be a mess.
It seems to me that what you are saying is that
you can try hard and play like a 5d for short spurts, and therefore the system should upgrade you to 5d. This is not how it works, nor should it. Because, by definition, then you fall down again and play like 4d or even weaker, for whatever reason - tiredness, distractions, fun, whatever. Well, this apparently does not cut it, and I for one am glad it does not. Everybody can have a good weak or put extra effort to put up a short spurt - this does not make them a rank stronger. If the rating system was so sensitive, lots of people would be overrated out there, and then lots of people would be underrated as well (after a bad week), and I for one am glad it is not so.
RobertJasiek wrote:
Quote:
best to switch to a server
It is much easier than that: I could switch my KGS account, but (so far) I prefer to see the system changed rather than to make the system even worse by producing more noise, which KGS then fights by keeping the rating system even stabler.
There is nothing wrong with creating two accounts, one for serious games one for casual ones. Many people have that.
I know you would rather change the world so that it makes sense to you, but you are not the only user and you will always have to compromise with what some others might want or prefer.
If you really play in different "modes" - like sometimes fun games, sometimes serious games, sometimes when you're tired or stressed, sometimes when you try very hard - this almost begs for multiple accounts. The rating system ranks you based on all your rated games, and
it it not the rating system's job to cherry pick only the "proper" games from your history, the ones you like, and rank you based on those. I am not sure why you would ever expect that. This is what multiple accounts are for, or at least the non-rated option in game setup.
You are smart enough to know all that, no?